From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel
Subject: Re: Is it planned to remove xemacs compatibility code?
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 13:35:21 -0400
Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Message-ID: <E1CMrhh-0002iI-TU@fencepost.gnu.org>
References: <is8xigy5.fsf@gmail.com> <jwvis8xjq54.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org>
	<87d5z5wau8.fsf@vh213602.truman.edu>
Reply-To: rms@gnu.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org
X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1098898671 17302 80.91.229.6 (27 Oct 2004 17:37:51 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 17:37:51 +0000 (UTC)
Cc: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, belanger@truman.edu, emacs-devel@gnu.org
Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Oct 27 19:37:42 2004
Return-path: <emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165])
	by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
	id 1CMrjx-0005fd-00
	for <ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org>; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 19:37:41 +0200
Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33)
	id 1CMrri-0008G9-3B
	for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 13:45:42 -0400
Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.33)
	id 1CMrqU-0007sP-6O
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 13:44:26 -0400
Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.33)
	id 1CMrqS-0007rO-GC
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 13:44:24 -0400
Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CMrqS-0007qy-1l
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 13:44:24 -0400
Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CMriX-0001EU-0Z
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 13:36:13 -0400
Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.34)
	id 1CMrhh-0002iI-TU; Wed, 27 Oct 2004 13:35:22 -0400
Original-To: belanger@truman.edu
In-reply-to: <87d5z5wau8.fsf@vh213602.truman.edu> (message from Jay Belanger
	on Tue, 26 Oct 2004 14:14:39 -0500)
X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." <emacs-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/emacs-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:29070
X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:29070

    What about the files that aren't distributed separately?

In some cases, there is a person who works on the file and also
supports it for XEmacs, and wants those conditionals to remain.
Or there may be some other specific kind of cooperation with XEmacs
for certain files.  However, where these things do not apply,
they can be deleted.

    Also, the manuals of some bundled packages have installation
    instructions; should these be kept?

It makes no sense to include these in Emacs; they ought to be deleted.
Would someone like to do that?